Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: supreme court of india Year: 2006 Page 11 of about 159 results (0.096 seconds)

Jul 26 2006 (SC)

Mineral Exploration Corporation Employees' Union Vs. Mineral Explorati ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jul-26-2006

Reported in : [2006(111)FLR409]; JT2006(7)SC151; (2006)IIILLJ482SC; (2006)4MLJ1212(SC); 2006(7)SCALE374; (2006)6SCC310

ar. lakshmanan, j.1. the appellant before us is the mineral exploration corporation employees' union (aituc) through its general secretary, respondent no. 1 is the mineral exploration corporation ltd., though its chairman and managing director, seminari hills, nagpur and the second respondent is the union of india through the secretary, ministry of labour, new delhi.2. the appellant-union preferred the above appeals against the common judgment and order dated 26.2.1999 of the high court of madhya pradesh at jabalpur in writ petition nos. 1981 and 5423 of 1998 whereby the high court allowed writ petition no. 1981 of 1998 filed by respondent no. 1 (corporation) and dismissed writ petition no. 5423 of 1998 filed by the union and has set aside the award passed by the industrial tribunal dated 24.3.1998.3. the appellant is a registered trade union affiliated to aituc. respondent no. 1 (corporation) is a public sector undertaking managed and controlled by the ministry of mines and is engaged in the exploration/discovery of mineral prospects/resources for rapid industrial growth in the country. respondent no. 1 is having various projects all over the country including their branches in the state of madhya pradesh and has employed approx. 5000 employees in various projects who are engaged in the exploration work in the projects.according to the union, the workmen engaged in mineral exploration corporation ltd., hereinafter referred to as 'the corporation' have completed minimum 8 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 29 2006 (SC)

Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd. Vs. Official Liquidator, High ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-29-2006

Reported in : AIR2007SC63; I(2007)BC147(SC); [2006]133CompCas915(SC); (2006)6CompLJ417(SC); 2007(3)CTC197; JT2006(12)SC603; 2006(10)SCALE28; (2006)10SCC709; [2006]72SCL130(SC); 2007(2)LC

s.b. sinha, j.1. leave granted.2. appellant herein is a government company. it is engaged in conduct of chitties. m/s concert capital limited together with its sister concern m/s concert securities limited took loan from it. they failed to repay the said loan. a recovery proceeding was initiated against the defaulting company under the kerala revenue recovery act, 1968. a notification was issued in that behalf in terms of section 71 thereof.3. the properties belonging to the defaulting company were attached. in the meanwhile, the company went for voluntary liquidation. a provisional liquidator was appointed. appellant was informed thereabout. in the pending company proceeding being c.a. no. 165 of 2001, appellant filed an application seeking leave to proceed with the sale of the properties, which was objected to, inter alia, on the premise that the charge in respect of the alleged debt was not registered with the registrar of companies and, thus, it was an unsecured creditor. a counter affidavit thereto was filed by respondent. a prayer was also made by the official liquidator for a direction upon appellant to surrender the original documents. the application for leave to proceed with the revenue recovery proceeding was rejected by a learned single judge of the high court by its order dated 28.11.2003. an appeal there against being company appeal no. 14 of 2004 preferred by appellant was dismissed by a division bench of the high court. appellant is, thus, before us.4. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 26 2006 (SC)

State of Bihar and ors. Vs. Amrendra Kumar Mishra

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-26-2006

Reported in : [2007(1)JCR33(SC)]; JT2006(12)SC304; 2006(9)SCALE549; 2007(2)SLJ214(SC); 2007(2)LC1346(SC)

s.b. sinha, j.1. leave granted.2. the bihar state subordinate service selection board issued an advertisement for appointment of 225 posts of live stock assistants in the animal husbandry department. respondent herein pursuant to or in furtherance of the said advertisement applied therefore. he was declared successful. on or about 21.12.1992, respondent herein along with other successful candidates had been recommended by the board. appointment letters were issued to 195 successful candidates, out of the 200 candidates recommended by the commisson. by a memo. no. 323 dated 21.02.1992, an appointment letter was sent to respondent asking him to join the post within fifteen days. he failed to join. allegedly, on 20.07.1994, he requested director, department of animal husbandry, to issue an appointment letter to him, stating:i came to know that the department had appointed maximum candidates till date and the appointment proceeding is going on for the remaining advertised 225 posts. my serial number is more above in the recommended merit list and junior persons to me have been appointed but i have not received any appointment letter till date for my joining. during the period of enquiry, i have come to know that the appointment letter of the selected candidates have been forwarded, whereas i have not received appointment letter till now. in the above facts and circumstances, i, therefore, request you to kindly pass the appropriate order immediately for giving me appointment .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 11 2006 (SC)

Commissioner, Bangalore Development Authority Vs. K.S. Narayan

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-11-2006

Reported in : AIR2006SC3379; 2007(4)BomCR436; JT2006(9)SC27; 2006(6)KarLJ712; 2006(10)SCALE163; (2006)8SCC336

g.p. mathur, j. 1. the issue involved in these appeals, by special leave, is identical and, therefore, they are being disposed of by a common order. for the sake of convenience facts of civil appeal 8307 of 2002, which has been filed challenging the judgment and decree dated 14.6.2001 passed by karnataka high court in r.f.a. no. 406 of 2001, shall be stated.2. the respondent k.s. narayan filed original suit no. 5371 of 1989 in the court of city civil judge, bangalore, praying that a decree for permanent injunction be passed against the defendant bangalore development authority, their agents and servants restraining them from interfering with the plaintiff's possession and enjoyment of the plaint scheduled property and from demolishing any structure situate thereon. the case of the plaintiff in brief is as follows. the plaintiff purchased the property in dispute bearing no. 46, situated in banasawadi village, k.r. pura hobli, bangalore south taluk from s. narayana gowda by means of a registered sale deed dated 17.6.1985. the erstwhile owners of the property had obtained conversion certificate from the tehsildar and the property is situated in a lay out which is properly approved by obtaining conversion for non- agricultural use from the competent authority. the plaintiff applied for mutation entries and the same was granted in his favour. the property in dispute was not covered by any acquisition proceedings as neither notice of acquisition had been received nor any award .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 29 2006 (SC)

Tulsan Vs. Pyare Lal and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-29-2006

Reported in : 2006(4)AWC3855(SC); (SCSuppl)2007(1)CHN92; 2007(2)CTC186; JT2006(9)SC254; 2006(10)SCALE69; (2006)10SCC782

s.b. sinha, j.1. leave granted.2. the parties are co-sharers. respondent no. 1 herein filed a suit against bir singh, respondent no. 3 as also appellant herein for permanent injunction. appellant is wife of respondent no. 2. a settlement was arrived at by and between the parties. the terms of the settlement were reduced to writing. it was filed before the court and accepted. a decree was passed on the basis of the terms of the said settlement. it was recorded therein:.now, the panchayat has settled the disputes amongst the parties to the effect that the portion where there is abadi and which is in the possession of which party, has been given to the same party and that there is no objection to the second party in this regard nor shall be there any objection in the future also. apart from it has been decided that the 1/3rd portion of the remaining lands shall go to pyare lal and 1/3rd portion shall go to amrit pal and mohan lal and ved prakash sons of kewal, grand sons of bir singh and the 1/3rd share shall go to bir singh son of shri asa ram. it has been further decided that all the criminal and civil cases going on between the parties shall be withdrawn and they shall be bound by the same. apart from the above, the will executed earlier shall be treated as cancelled and a new will shall be executed in the light of the above decision. all the three parties shall bear the expenses in equal-shares. for which none of the parties shall have any objection. it has been further .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 17 2006 (SC)

The Managing Director the North East Karnataka Road Transport Corporat ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Nov-17-2006

Reported in : [2007(112)FLR466]; 2006(12)SCALE377

ar. lakshmanan, j.1. leave granted. 2. the sole respondent was served through the court on 10.1.2005. however, nobody has appeared for the respondent. we heard mr. basava prabhu s. patil, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-management.3. this appeal is directed against the final order dated 25.2.2005 passed by the high court of karnataka at bangalore in writ appeal no. 1565 of 2004, wherein division bench of the high court rejected the appeal filed by the appellant herein and ordered accordingly. this court on 22.8.2005 issued notice to the sole respondent and interim stay was granted in the meantime. the respondent was in the employment of the appellant corporation as a badli conductor . during his course of employment as badli conductor between the period from 1992 to 1995, he had an unedifying history of misconduct and had been punished by imposing fine. while he was conducting the bus on 12.8.1992, the said bus came to be checked by the checking squad at stage no. 2 and it was noticed that the respondent had failed to issue tickets to 6 passengers despite collection of money, failed to issue tickets to 4 passengers who were travelling from sanganakal to keb, bellary and had not collected the requisite fare. the respondent had closed the stage no. 3 by keeping single digit blank in respect of rs. 1.25 denomination with an intention to re-issue the said denomination tickets in the next trip and the respondent had closed the cwp against the stage no. 2 except the rs. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 21 2006 (SC)

Lekha Vs. P. Anil Kumar

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Nov-21-2006

Reported in : 2007(1)ALT35(SC); (SCSuppl)2007(1)CHN98; I(2007)DMC57SC; [2007(2)JCR221(SC)]; JT2006(10)SC516; 2007(1)KLT9(SC); (2007)2MLJ298(SC); (2007)148PLR71; 2006(12)SCALE163; 2007(3)

ar. lakshmanan, j.1. leave granted.2. the present appeal is directed against the order of the high court of kerala allowing matrimonial appeal for the custody of the child of the respondent by reversing the finding of fact arrived at by the trial court. the trial court, after considering the evidence on record and interviewing the child, came to the conclusion that for the welfare of the child the custody should be given to the mother and dismissed the original petition of the respondent-father filed under the guardians and wards act holding that he is not entitled for the custody of the child. on appeal, the high court reversed the finding of the trial court and directed to give the custody of the child to the father without interviewing the child. the high court also permitted the respondent to take the child to gulf. background facts:3. the marriage between the appellant and the respondent was solemnized on 31.01.1994 as per hindu religious rites and customs. out of the said wedlock, a son, namely, rohit vishnu was born and he is 12 years old now. at the time of marriage, the respondent was employed abroad. after marriage the appellant and the respondent lived together for 2 months and thereafter they lived separately because of the misunderstanding between them. since the harassment and cruelty of the respondent crossed the extreme extent, the appellant was compelled to file a petition for divorce on the ground of cruelty. the respondent filed a petition for restitution .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 27 2006 (SC)

Syed Ibrahim Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jul-27-2006

Reported in : AIR2006SC2908; 2006CriLJ4087; JT2006(6)SC597; 2006(7)SCALE399; (2006)10SCC601

arijit pasayat, j.1. leave granted.2. challenge in this appeal is to the judgment rendered by a division bench of the andhra pradesh high court upholding the conviction of the appellant for an offence punishable under section 302 of the indian penal code, 1860 (in short the 'ipc'). the trial court had found the appellant guilty of murdering his wife on 10.1.1994. the accused was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. accused challenged the conviction and sentence by filing an appeal before the high court which was numbered as criminal appeal no. 511 of 1997. initially by order dated 30.4.1998 a division bench of the high court allowed the appeal. the respondent-state filed an appeal before this court. since the order passed by the high court was practically unreasoned, without expressing any opinion on merits, the judgment was set aside and the matter was remitted to the high court for fresh disposal. the high court by the impugned judgment dismissed the appeal confirming the order of the conviction and sentence passed by learned session judge, guntur.3. the background facts, as projected by prosecution during trial in a nutshell are as follows:durbhakula lakshmi (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased') was living with the appellant (hereinafter referred to as the 'accused') since about 15 years and gave birth to two children. on 10.1.1994, at about 10.a.m. while the deceased, her father-durbhakula venkateswarlu (pw1), her brother, durbhakula ramu (pw2) and her sister .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 24 2006 (SC)

Tulsi and ors. Vs. Chandrika Prasad and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-24-2006

Reported in : AIR2006SC3359; 2007(1)ALD20(SC); 2006(4)AWC3644(SC); 2006(4)CTC766; [2007(1)JCR87(SC)]; JT2006(8)SC158; 2007(1)MhLj893; 2007(I)OLR(SC)196; 2006(8)SCALE515; (2006)8SCC322

s.b. sinha, j. 1. leave granted. 2. whether the deed dated 30.12.1968 constitutes a sale with condition of purchase or mortgage by way of conditional sale is the question which falls for consideration in this appeal which arises out of a judgment and order dated 27.7.2004 passed by the high court of jharkhand in f.a. no. 23 of 1991 (r) . 3. the basic fact of the matter is not in dispute. the property in question is a house property. it belonged to one jawala prasad sah, defendant no. 3 in the suit. on 30.12.1968, he transferred the northern part of the house property to one balmukund chaudhary by way of mortgage for a consideration of rs. 4,300/- repayable by 30.1.1971. he sold the entire property to the plaintiffs for a valuable consideration of rs. 14,000/-. it included the right to redeem the mortgage. the transaction in question was also carried out on the same date, i.e. 30.12.1968. the husband of the appellant no. 1 herein banshidhar singhania was a tenant in the said premises. the respondents filed a suit for a decree for redemption of the said mortgage as also a decree for mesne profit for the period 3.1.1972 till the recovery of possession of the mortgaged property. in the alternative, a prayer for a decree of specific performance was made. 4. it is not in dispute that prior to filing of the suit by several notices, the plaintiffs expressed their intention to redeem the mortgage. a personal tender of the entire mortgage amount was made which was refused. an .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 31 2006 (SC)

Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan Vs. Arunkumar Madhavrao Sinddhaye and anr ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-31-2006

Reported in : AIR2007SC192; JT2006(9)SC549; (2007)2MLJ269(SC); 2006(11)SCALE353; (2007)1SCC283; 2007(3)SLJ41(SC)

g.p. mathur, j.1. these appeals, by special leave, have been preferred against the judgment and decree dated 5.3.2002 of bombay high court by which the second appeal preferred by the respondent arunkumar madhavrao sinddhaye was allowed and the suit filed by him was decreed setting aside the order of termination of services dated 21.3.1975 and directing his reinstatement with full back wages. the appellant preferred a review petition before the high court which was dismissed on 3.11.2003 and the said order is also under challenge. 2. the respondent arunkumar madhavrao sinddhaye was appointed on a temporary post of physical education teacher in the kendriya vidyalaya sangathan on 25.6.1974. his services were terminated vide order dated 21.3.1975 in accordance with conditions of appointment mentioned in the appointment order. he filed a suit for a declaration that the order of termination of his services dated 21.3.1975 was illegal, inoperative and not binding upon him. the main plea taken in the suit instituted by the respondent was that his services had been terminated by way of punishment as an enquiry had been held behind his back in which some witnesses were examined and after completion of the enquiry, in which he had not been given any opportunity to defend himself, a report was submitted against him and on the basis of the said report his services were terminated. the suit was defended by the appellant on several grounds and the principal ground being that the services .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //